technology and firm performance in mexico potx

In this paper, we estimate the effeet of new technology adoption TA on wage inequality using a rich punel database of ‘manufacturing firms that identifies TA and tracks firms over time,

‘The World Bank

| Latin America and he Caribbean Region

overt Reduction and Economic Management Secor Unit

| February 2002

Pouicy Resrancn Woakine Pari 2778

Abstract

{épex-Aceredoimestigates the reionship between a

fen aogtion of new manufacuring echnology andi

performance, A pane database thar denis

Techoologal adoption ad acs rs eer tine allows

the as of deen meaner pectormance—

segs products, ne employment growth ob

Crean, job detection Reus show at

techooogy socaed wih igh rm performance in

“This papers produ ofthe Latin Americ an the Caribbean Region, Poverty Relucsion ad Economie Management Sector Uniti pt of larger llr nthe ei to eedace poverty and egy through human capital nesmen Copies fhe paper ae aashe ee ton the Wold Bank 1818 H Set NV, Washingeon, DC 20433 Pleas conc Mice Celle rom 4404 epone202-58-5 fox 202 552-2112, mall addres melerwodhak or ois Research Working Papers ae also posed on dhe Wel at hps/econworbank.rs The ah may he contacted 3 siceedoir worldbankog February 2002 2 page)

"he ay Roar og Fy el cm i of pp a ang of ew a ‘tty et ort aie Te |

ileal aed Te?

‘psi et st rs The Be ony it of Wk Bo Dn TC

Produced bythe Research Adbaory Sth

Mexico ~ Technology, Wages, and Employment

TECHNOLOGY AND FIRM PERFORMANCE IN MEXICO

{Introduction

Inthe last to decades, broad-based reforms at both the sector and macroeconomic levels have fundamentally structured the economic and institutional framework in Mexico In the mid 1980s, Mexico began t0 sift from a stateinerventionist system to a market-based economy, Reforms instituted a liberal trade regime, established captal-account convertibility, privatized public enterprises (including banks), and reduced goverament repulation of the financial,

‘canspontation, and utility setors At the macroeconomic level, fiscal discipline and structural reform brought shout sharp decline in the fiseal deficit and inflation,

The government first launched a radial program of policy reforms in 1989 simed at reducing government regulation and liberalzing ade Trade liberalization, which began in mid-

1985 and accelerated after Mexico joined the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1986, further intensified with the adoption of the North American Pree Trade Agreement in 1994

Tough the extemal openness of the Mexiean economy has quickly expended, internat reforms have been slower to materialize The World Bank (1998a) indicated tht the productivity đierenee berween expor and non-trade sectors reflets the difference in speed between international and internal regulatory reform Iti telling in relation wo this that manufacturing, the

‘most important tae sector, improved rapidly in the eatly 1990s while the service sector deteriorated But manufacturing only accounts for 25 percent of Mexican gross domestic product, while services account for over 40 percent, which may explain the slow response of the

‘Mexican economy to vigorous trade policy reforms (World Bank 1998)

During this lst decade of rapid development, Mexican wages have polarized The World Bank (2000) contends thet skil-biased technical change caused by trade liberalization explains best the increase in earnings inequality that Mexico has experienced In this paper, we estimate the effeet of new technology adoption (TA) on wage inequality using a rich punel database of

‘manufacturing firms that identifies TA and tracks firms over time, Furthermore, we compate the performance of firms that adopt new technology to those that do not using thre separate firm performance measures: the wages eamed by workers, the productivity of a firm (output per

worker), and the annual grow in the number of employed workers; while other studies have tended to use a single measure of performance

Section 2 of this paper reviews relevant literature on firm performance and TIA Section 3 explains the data and our methodology Section 4 discusses results for fim performance by time period, firm size, and firm location Section 5 presents results of the TA doterminants and wage performance joint estimation Section 6 analyzes wage inequality Section 7 offers conclusions

2 Literature Review

A Performance Measures

Studies measure firm performance in different ways, eflecting both the heterogencity ø' the concept and the challenge of practically measuring it In this paper we use five messures of firm performance—wages, productivity, net employment, job creation, and job destruction

‘These measures are proxies fora faitly amorphous concept We want to understand how healthy firm is, how likely it isto exist in the future, how much utility it creates for workers and consumers, andthe contribution it makes to Mexico's development Our measures by no means exhaustively cover these concepts, which collectively constitute firm performance, but a firm

‘with high marks in these measures also hasan exemplary performance

Employment grow isa prevalent measure of firm performance (Geroski 1995) Positive changes in employment represent superior performance; negative changes in employment represent inferior performance As Caves (1998) documents in his exhaustive compilation,

‘employment growth has been used in many types of studies as a measure of firm performance (Baldwin and Rafiqusseaman 1995; Audreseh 1995; Davis, Haltiwanger, and Schuh 19966; [Baldwin 1995), Employment growth is particularly important for policy makers who focus on job creation As noted by Davis, Haltiwanger, and Schuh (1996a) job creation and destruction ate part of a larger process determining changes inthe number and mix of jobs In this process, new businesses enter the market, some expand, others contrac, and many disappear

‘Additionally, capital, workers, and jobs are continually relocated between different activities

The creation and destruction of jobs requires workers to decide between employment and

‘unemployment, AS a result of these processes, some workers must suffer long unemployment spells or severe declines in their eanings Others may retire early or change residence to find work

[A second measure of frm performance is the wages that the Bin pay to workers A healthy firm may pay high efficiency wages, ort may simply maintain high quality of life fr its workers by paying high wages, The wages paid by fms have byen used as a measure of fem peeformance in numerous studies, including Ave and Batra (1999), Audretsch and others (2001), Bartel and Lichtenberg (1991), Berman, Bound, and Griliches (1994), Bemand and Jensen (1995), Brown snd Medoff (1989), Dunne and Schmitz (1995), Doms, Dunne, and Troske (1997), and Oosterbeck and van Praag (1995)

Another frm performance used inthis paper is fim peoduetivity This measure has also

‘been used in numerous studies, including Baldwin and Rafiguzzaman (1995), Baldwin (1995), Bartel and Lichtenberg (1991), Aw and Batra (1999), Baily, Bartlsman, and Haltiwanger (1996), and Baily, Hulten, and Campbell (1992), Higher produetivity represents superior performance; lower productivity represents inferior performance,

These measures of firm performance are nowidentical; in cases they may be contradictory For example, i is certainly feasible that a frm increases productivity by reducing employment (Baily Bartelsman, and Haltiwanger 1996) In such an instance, productivity would indicate superior performance, while employment would suggest inferior performance We try to interpret results in eases where the firm performance measures indicate similar performance pattems When this similarity is absent fom results, we either mention each metic separately or

‘exclude the specific results fom discussion,

BB, Linking Technological Adopsion o Firm Performance Measures

‘Some theoretical studies argue against stating unequivocal effects of TA on a developing country’s labor force Braverman (1974) contends thatthe introduction of advanced technology

results in a reduction of the average skil of workers In this view, technology simply replaces stilled workers Additionally, Rush and Ferraz (1993) find that technology improvements increase skils for some groups and leave others largely unaffected

‘A variety of studies link TA to frm performance One is Doms, Dunne, and Roberts (1995), who examine the impact of advanced manufacturing technology on US manufacturing firms They use data from the 1988 Survey of Manufacturing Technology to identify the

‘adoption by establishments of 17 different advanced production technologies These

‘technologies include such innovations as CAD/CAM systems, robots, computers, and networks They find evidence that finns adopting technology exhibit superior performance, Another is

‘Audetsch and others (2001), who use wages, productivity and employment as performance

‘measures fora panel of firms in The Netherlands They find that investments in research and {development (R&D) and skilled labor improve firm performance

‘Avr and Batra (1999) provide evidence that technology (measured by R&D and worker training) hes an impact on firm performance (measured by wages) Ths is consistent with the

‘World Bank (1999), which also relates wages to technology (measured by R&D and technology acquisition

Several studies have confirmed the relationship between TA and firm size (Mansfield 1962; Davies 1979; Romeo 1975; and Globerman 1975) This is probably one ofthe most robust results among surveys analyzing determinants of TA (Lépez-Acevedo 2001) Others have found that firm size determines wages As noted by Brown and Medoff (1989), other things being

‘qual, large employers pay more than small employers One way to explain this wage differential

fs through labor quality Under this view, larger firms employ higher quality workers due to the greater capital intensity and captal-skill complementarity of larger establishments

reductions corelate with average wage increases The coreelaton may reflect simply an increase

in productivity caused by a relative increase inthe portion of skilled labor In a related vein, Tan (2000) investigates manufacturing Sector data For Malaysia, and finds that information and

‘communication technology increases taal factor productivity by 4 0 6 percent analy

Sargent and Matthews (1997) conclude that installing capital intensive, computer controlled production machinery into a formerly manual Mexican plant dees not impel a fem to

train low skilled workers Ifthe adoption of advanced manufacturing technologies causes an increase in plant size, then it also increases the firm's skill development activity, However, they also Find that productivity and skill development do not eorelate with compensation

{3.Data and Methodology

‘The data sed inthis paper comes fiom a panel of manufteturng firms created with data fiom the National Survey of Employment, Salaries, Technology, and Training (ENESTYC) and the Annual Industry Survey (FTA) The pane! includes observations for 1992, 1995, and 1999.)

(Our goal i to understand, for particular types of firms, how is technology related to each firm's performance measure For this estimation, we use a similar specification for the different performance measures:

loge) = f+ DiXe Pradopte + as a where:

log(7/) = he logarithm ofthe performance measure;

ie vector of firm characteristics;

‘adoply = a dummy variable indicating whether the fim adopted new technology:

‘normal regression error;

i ‘refers to the frm being considered, and

' ~ the time period

* Fora descpin of thes survey nthe pel sce Appendix A and in lens

For the productivity measure, we include ạ continuous variable for capital assets to control for correlation between capital and TA, since both influence productivity Within each

measur, foreach time period, we restict the sample only to firms ofa particular size or locaton

to estimate situation-specific effets, We do not present results by industry, nor for _mieroenterprises, due to insufficient observations

‘We measure wages in real pesos, productivity as units of output divided by the munber of Workers, and net employment as the difference between new hires and dismissals for a given year Since we have detailed plant level information, we measure net job cretion using Tim- level employment changes, rather than worker level changes

4, Results

Several models were estimated Only the results from the best models are discussed here

We estimated equation (1) using a fixed effects model specification’ As an experiment, we also estimated a random effects model specification, however, the results were broadly similar,

‘though the fixed effects model tended to yield more robust estimates of the TA parameters of imerest, Therefore, we only discuss the results of the fixed effects estimations for all the

‘measures, organized by the sample universe (only small firms, only firms in the Nonh, te), in Table 14

A Overall,

On balance, firms that adopt new technology exhibit superior performance in all the setrcs than those firms that di not adopt technology Controlling for fiem size, age the skill level of workers, and firms in the maquila sector, firms that adopted new technology in the 1992-

99 sample are related with higher wages for workers of all skill levels Controlling also for

“The ine ffs model plement he Fit ileacng approach that gneaes parameter eines messed

Ìn rms of changes over tinea, at De sane tne, eliminates ary pote ses for uneasied feTevel

‘cor hal may be cored wh eluded varable

‘ital AI A1 8 show complete eu ofthe fixe efit stinatons fr ech fm performance esi

capital assets, firms that adopted new technology in the same period are associated with a 26 percent higher productivity than firms that did not adopt technology

An Wages: Toa Ds0sk * -Dss54 % —pUSB6 T1247

Highly sites 02817 ** 02365 ** 02448 18614 Semishiled 04951 ** (S865 “+ 09BẾS 13722 tr owskilsd 02861 °* 0427) * D4410 /12399

Sal sce Wages: Tol oa 02756 * aot e678 *

Highly skiled 013902806 OLIT? [2.818 ++

Sembatiled 0222 % 0202 00190 19052 Low sled 02393 ++ 03264 + (009) (22491 Produits oom * ‘oat 0290.180088

Nevemployment 0.736 Lo 2965

‘Medium size Wages: Total oz + [04686 + "0.1985 | 16908

Highiysiled 0303 ++ pasT4 th I3 | 15258 Sealed THỌ D4661 tr 02896 680s Tr

ow sled 02145 + 03948 + 003 17759 Prosivity Done ome ++ 02059 03004 ++

Sanh Total wages 21898 % |oasse “1.6635

Prodi doo 049s onan

Nevemployest LỚP ,026 1.4662 Total wages "mm * "0.2869 Proc boss ‘ates ** 0401

ment 05631 +9

Inthe later period of 1995-99, firms adopting new technology ate associated with 56 percent higher wages, and S4 percent higher productivity than firms that did not adopt technology Inthe earlier period of 1992-95, firms that adopted new technology are related with

SI percent higher wages, S percent higher productivity, and employment of 34 percent more workers than firs that id not adopt technology

‘exceptions are for wage performance infims located inthe Center and South regions

Firms adopting technology are associated with SI percent higher wages in the early period, and 56 percent higher wages in the later period, than firms that didnot adopt technology

‘Although the net employment measurement forall ims appears to contradict this trend, net

‘employment is not significant in the later perio

‘The relation of technology with job creation, measured as the number of new hires in a given year, is higher for the 1995-99 period than forthe 1992-95 period Moreover, technology is positively associated with job destruction, measured asthe numbers of dismissals ina given yea, {nthe 1992-95 period, while there is no significant relation inthe 1995-99 period

In only two statistically significant cases the relation of technology with firms’ performance was higher in the early period than the late In the Center and South of Mexico, technology was less effective in 1995.99 than in 1992-95 Inthe North, the change in the wage performance between time periods was 32 percent; in the Capital, the change was 29 percent; in the Center, the change was -56 percent, and in the South it was -166 percent We should note that in both periods technology sil is associated with higher wages, but inthe Center and South Aechoology is related to wages by a smaller percentage in the later period than in the earlier petiod Much of Mexico's trade-dependent industry isin the North near the U.S, border and in

the Capital I may be that these industies were more affected by liberalization and the 1994 crisis, and so the increased competition they experienced added to the value of technology for them,

‘These analyses suggest a robust conclusion forthe 1992-99 period For a worker of any single skill group technology negatively coreates with firm size For highly skilled workers, small technology fiems are associated toa wage increase of 213 percent, medium technology firms of

153 percent, and large technology firms of 132 percent, For low skilled workers, small technology firms ae related to a wage increase of 226 percent, medium technology firms are related to a wage inerease of 178 percent, and large technology firms are related to a wage Increase of 161 percent Wages for semi-skilled workers experience similar differences It appears that for large firms relative to small ones, technology increases employment to some extent but decreases wages, In absolute terms, technology inereases wages and employment in

‘both smal an large firms, but its relative effet differs between firm sizes

‘The relation of technology with the performance ofa firm's productivity also positively contlates with firm size For medium-size firms, technology is associated with a 20 percent effect on productivity, while for lage Firms its 23 percent

D Firm Location

[No regional relationship exists in the first time period, but inthe later period, firms located in the Capital or close to the U.S border, present the largest effect of technology on performance Inthe 1995-99 period, technology firms in the North are associated toa SB percent

‘wage increase over their non-technology peers; firms inthe Capital are associated to 65 percent benefit firms in the Center are associated to a 56 percent benefit, and firms in the South are associated toa 47 peroent benefit For productivity, Northern technology firms are related to a 71 percent benefit, Capital technology firms are related to a 49 percent benefit, and Cental technology firms are related to a 46 percent benefit However, in the earlier period, this trend was reversed: Norther technology firms were associated with a26 percent wage benefit, Capital {echnology firms were associated with a 36 percent benefit, Cental firms were associated with a

112 percent benefit, and Southern firms were associated with a 213 percent benefit

For the complete 1992-99 period, the highest relation between productivity and technology is forthe Norther firms (40 percent, and the highest relation between technology and wages is for the Capital firms (156 percent),

'5.A Joint Estimation for Wage Performance and Technology Adoption

In addition tothe association between TA and firm performance we took into account the causality between TA and firm performance Therefore, we conducted a joint estimation forthe

‘TA and worker wages equations using a three-stage least squares method Since this paper investigates the relation of technology with fim performance rather than the determinants of TA,

‘we only show results forthe regression with worker wages as dependent variable (Table 2)

‘These results present expected findings Technology is related to wages by quite large mounts in all three-time periods However, surprisingly, we find tht this relation is larger for the 1992-95 period than for the 1995-99 period Larger firms paid higher wages than smaller firms in the later period, though in the first period (1992-95) smaller firms appeared to pay higher wages than large firms,

Yer Tos 1999 605 #51945) | ane + 2asa| “Sanne m seo Sop10 ++ 8686

Constant SAU th tase S167 s+ 019] 93615 99k

eg (Teebrolgy adoption) nan 01088 dũng

Ring (Wage Perlomanee Di 00711 FT)

6, Wage Inequality

‘To estimate the effect of TA on wage inequality, we estimate fixed effects models where

‘he dependent variable isthe logarithm of the wages of skilled workers divided by the wages of unskilled workers We run two regressions: one forthe logarithm ofthe ratio of highly skilled workers” wages to unskilled workers” wages, and another forthe logarithm of the ratio of semi- skilled workers’ wages fo unskilled workers’ wages Table 3 shows that, controlling for relevant firm characteristics: technology has exacerbated the wage gap between semi-skilled and unskilled workers by shout eleven percent in the seven years of our sample Additionally, the higher the overall skill fevel of a firm, the larger the wage gap between skilled and unskilled workers, We also find that smaller firms have worse wage inequality than larger firms in the 1992-95 period

Results for wage inequality between highly skilled and unskilled workers appear in Table A2A TA worsens wage inequality between highly skied and unskilled workers in all three periods, but results are statistically insignificant However, as in the fist case, the higher the

‘overall skill level of a firm, the larger the wage gap between highly skilled and unskilled workers

13

sie: "Sea = yee’ THME© islam aaa pase gaa!

ie đậm JSam “hawlapn

se Đm.-nguani [HỢn TM” 2U mm mE= TH[Tnn= dd

CC [tu d0|tmỤa G00) Ha

ih HN 001380 4100 08s

Man (tee ” “alam ” “oon tạm

Technology adoption ng Nợ | | ase 00059 0.136] 0.1270 ** - 2064) 01186 9+ tse

‘aaa aired định 99m oe sâm | ake Mỹ

me | font ssa oe

ooo sa et

7 Conclusions

Using a panel of fiems with observations in 1992, 1995, and 1999, this paper has sought

to understand how new technology correlates with the performance of Mexican manufacturing firms, measured by wages, productivity, net employment, job creation, and job destruction We use fixed effects models to estimate firm performance and determine wage inequality Results suggest that contcolling for relevant variables, technology is positively elated to fim performance Trade liberalization and the 1994 crisis magnified this relation The effet of new technology on firm peeformance also correlates positively and strongly with firm size, and

‘proximity 10 the U.S border or location in Mexico City Results present expected findings, that

is, technology is correlated with higher wages in all ime periods

In an analysis of the behavior of wages, ‘TA improves the wages of both low-skill

‘workers and high skill worker, although it improves the latter more,

References

‘Audeetsch,D.B 1995 ovation and Int) Evolution Cambridge: MIT ress

Audretsch, D, B G van Leeuwen, B Mendveld, and R, Thước 200L "Market Dynamies ia the

‘Netherlands: Competition Policy and the Role of Snll Fim.” Jnernaonal Journal of Industrial Organization 19(2):795-822,

‘Aw, B, ¥.and G Batra 1999, “Wages, Eim Size and Wage Inequality: How Much do Exports Mater?

In DB, Avdrotch and R Thurk, eds, Innovation Indusry Evolution and Employment Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 13-36,

Baily, M N.C Hulten, and D Campbell 1992 “The Distribution of Productivity in Manufacturing Plans.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activiy: Miroeconomics ‘187-267,

Bareleman nd J alivanger, 1996 "Downsizing and Productivity Growth: Myth or

‘Small Business Economies 88) 259-78 Baldwin, JR, 1995, De Dynamics of Industrial Comprition, Cambridge: Cambridge Univesity Press

Baldwin, JR and M, Rafiguzzaman,1995.~Seletion versus Evolutionary Adoption: Learning and Post Enry Performance” International Journal of Industrial Organization 138) 501-22

Barcl, A P.and FR Lichtenberg 1991 "The Age of Technology and Its Impact on Employee Wages.” Economies of ovation and New Technology 1(2):21531

‘esman, EJ Bond, and 7 Griliches, 1998, “Changes inthe Demand for Skill Labor within USS

‘Manufacturing” Evidence ftom the Anoual Survey of Manufactures” Quarterly Jounal of Economies 1092) 36797

Bemard, A.B and J.B, Jensen 1995 "Exporters, Jos, and Wages in US Manufacturing: 1976-1987."

‘Brookings Papers on Eeonomic tity Meroeconomics ‘7-112,

Braverman H 1974 "Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Workin the 20 Contr” New

‘York: Monthly Review Press

Browa, C and J Medof 1959, “The Employer Size-Wage Effect.” Journal of Political Economy 9718) 027-59

Caves, RE, 1998, “Industrial Organization and New Findings on the Turnover and Mobility of Fs.” Toure of Economie Literature 368) 1947-82

Davies 1979 Difaion of Proce Innovations Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres

Davi Halivanger, and 8, Schuh, 1996, Job Creation and Desruction, Cambridge: MIT

, 1996, “Small Business and Jol Creation: Dissecting the Myth and Reassessing the Fact” Sait Business Economics 8A) 291315

Dunne, T and J A Schmitz Jr 1995, ‘Wages, Employment Stucture and Employer Sie-Wage Prem

“he: Relationship 10 Advanced-Technology Usage at U.S Manufacturing Ustabishments Feonamiea 62043): 89-107

Goroski, PA 1998 “What Do We Know About Entry?" Inernaional Jounal of Indhsrial

‘Organisation 13(4) 421-40,

Gioberman, S 1975 “Technological Dison in the Canadian Too! and Die Industry.” Review of

“Eeomomics and Stats S12) 28-3,

Léges-Acevedo, G 2001 "Determinants of Technology Adoption in Mexicn." Technical Paper World Bank

Mansfield, E1962 “Entry, Gibrats Law, Innovation, andthe Growth of Fim.” Amrican Economic Review S25) 1023.51

(Oostebeek, H, and M van Praag 1995, “Finn Size Wage Diffirentals in the Netherlands.” Small

Rush, H and J C Ferraz 1993 “Employment and Skils in Brazil: The Implications of New

“Technolgies and Organizational Techniques.” International Labour Review 1341) 75-95,

Sargent, and L Matthews 1997 Skil Developent and Integrated Manufacturing in Meco." World Developmen 25(10): 169-81,

‘Tan, H 2000, “Technologie Change and Skils Demand: Panel Evidence from Malaysian Manufacturing” Working Paper The World Bank laste

‘World Bank, 1982 "Mexico Country Eeanomic Memorandum: Enhancing Total Factor Productivity Growth.” Report No, T392-ME (Gray Cover), August

19980, “Mexico: Swengthening Enterprise Finance: Recent Trends in Enterprise Financing” Report No 17733-ME (Green Cover, September

+, 1999, "Mexican Labor Markets: New Views on Integration and Flexibility.” Volume Two:

“Technical Papers Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Unt, Mexico Department

=, 2000, “Eamings Inequality ater Mexico's Beonomic and Educaional Reforms." Report No 19945-ME (Gray Cover), May

16

ANNEX 1: Firm Performance Fixed Efets Estimations

“Table ALL Wage Performance of Manufacturing in,

mo Hình die | 048 Senvached | ong s+ 868 G806 nó nnes7| ‘Ooois "oss | conse “+ 337| “Soret s+ “20 Sano

tows | Gomme * $306 Gooit #11253) mos * Gane Magia TRhơig somm | 0n TP] 033% ours 396) Gomme 3985 “TAIT nó dan 44315) ag "Sota

Coma ‘Sons “+ SN, đƠM n lBEMI hove Ss Sonu Nano oe Wa within | Tae ies | asia aa

igh skied worker) | CofE Tínm Chuadteirie ĐỀ | Coe est | Coote

Sa Seat joan ++ -tasz) -14n2 +2309) 06486

ey 1888 + 2177| 08857

tae” | ốkx® run 3a

nes pines: ighystites | “Omer s+ 3IỂ| ooze s+ 10550] 0006 agen ** 133917 | Dion s+ 3937| -01010 +

Sembkiled’ | 0007 ** Towakiied | oa += 2503| ovis «= 2908| GUAlD tr 883| 00A0 + S858) 08036 +

agua In sa ẽ sa

Teologylopim | 02M7 24T0| 0536 m 8733| “Tosis +

Consam —_| oust ++ (00/9) 435i t= TU, nose +»

Number orbs Reg wie oss 5001 =) ats 3880 | 0ữmƠ6

‘Table AL Wage Peformance of Semi Skilled Workers in Manufactoring Firms

Maguia 0038s 0178) 000% 0803| 02

Tectroogy adoption ‘onan | U41 + mois + sease| sans 7HẾ| 04866 s12 3| 12722 5219] G20

Rap xiên teveen Đăng đãng 03m băng

‘Sic | cot HH | tse | cot ase wt ve

Tr [om aml ane omi| ium sếp

ie 383 BR AUS AB ĐH l5

ss Som menans| Tết” shay 885/05 THỊ ĐT cm Tiếp HẠ| tạm non

Sram | 388% as Sar] ame SB Magi san sh San) Si" he

đến Maeno

ae Một ue poet ea